Nanomachines in your blood which extract all the energy your body needs from ambient electromagnetic radiation along with smart nanowebs that are able to reshape themselves into any taste or texture of food imaginable, that you can eat as much as you want of and your body just moves it out ready to be used again, little clean pellets transferred between the toilet and the food synthesizer.

>>37417Insects are actually tasty, and since Im a basic bitch who is afraid of science, I will be eating fried crickets while everyone else is enjoying their filet mignons made out of stemcells of their own diarrhea.

Not for ethical or health reasons but for economical ones.Nature is incredible inefficient when it comes to providing product for us to consume. It has to be, simply because it's not the original intent (I'd say it has none but that's not up to debate right now)

Using biotech to synthesize foods has a tremendous advantage of cutting out the middle man so to speak. You don't have to provide living conditions for several different organisms to get the product but rather just one (or none).

Genetically Engineered bacteria could eventually be utilized to mass synthesize all our needs. Put these results through a food 3d printer and you could have all the variety of foodstuffs we currently enjoy, just without carcinogens and way cheaper in terms of energy required.

>>37421>>37417Vegan wet dreams. Pasturage will continue to be important economic resources for centuries and there's every indication of acceleration, not deceleration, in the meat industry.

Vegans trick themselves into thinking "if we invent it, they will come!" And that's simply not how it works. Of course, all vegans have autism spectrum disorder so that's understandable as to how you misjudge the consumer this hard.

PROTIP: You can invent all the insect burgers you like, they'll clog up the vegetarian isle of the supermarket and nobody will pay them mind. Supply and demand. You'll be faced with endless Fudds and soccer mom cunts who tell themselves it's natural so it's better it's natural so it's better it's natural so it's better and buy up all the chuck in the isle.

They don't give a shit if Africans starve and they never have. Your arguments from resource efficiency don't matter to them and it won't matter once the population of this Earth caps at 10 billion people and the Malthusian catastrophe you prey for never happens (inb4 lots of "fresh memes" like peak resources autistic vegan cannot research properly)

>>37427Dude what. Yes there is of course growth in the meat industry as human population increases. But the actual demand of meat, especially if the whole world consumed meat at the rate of the biggest meat eating countries, would far exceed the planetary ecology's capacity to support. Traditional meat production on earth is only viable under circumstances of extreme and widespread wealth inequality.

Imagine just how long you will keep pay $100 dollars for that traditional steak once the Chinese middle class finally begins demanding beef at the same level as Americans, when there is a normally priced vat grown steak also available. You ideology will become irrelevant in the face of unyielding economic reality.

I don't really care though because you are obviously just trolling hard. Trolling vegans, really? Low hanging fruit picker much?

My dream would be for people to be able to manipulate artificially constructed foods at the molecular level, to create the absolute perfect, best tasting foods possible. Imagine a burger that tasted like perfectly spiced, mostly fat/rare meat, but had the nutritional qualities of beans, nuts, and sashimi. As orgasmic a food experience as it's possible to have, all the while being the optimal nutritional intake for your body.

This reminds me of that Sliders episode where the team gets to a futuristic world and there's nothing to eat besides "geo-mash", which was made from algae afaik.

IMO our grandchildren wil eat a lot less meat or seafood (as it becomes more expensive), and rather rely on insects or certain algae for protein. However, there will still be a market for normal meat (after all, farmers will still need a lot of shit to fertilize their crops).

I also think a lot more of the food would be sold in an "instant" form. Having tried a lot of different instant ramens, i've been quite impressed at what the asians can put in those... further development on that front would help preserve nutrients better and add additional variety to the ingredients of these instant foods. This development would be especially beneficial to eg. long-range space travel.

The foods we know and love today would become "luxury" foods for special occasions...

>>37430Not really though. People are discounting soiless growing mediums for feedstock. We could build giant skyscrapers with levels and levels of corn or hay growing under LED grow lights in hydroponics or something similar that pump out tons of corn, then the amount of pasture needed to feed the cows would decrease significantly. It's just a matter of mining the mineral resources needed to build the the buildings and systems and to fertilize the plants. I think soiless growing mediums are going to become more important. If we get enough cheap energy from fusion or renewables we can pump water wherever it is needed, and even desalinate ocean water if need be. Energy production currently limits us, but in 50 years fusion should make all sorts of things possible.

I think people should start getting used to living and working in large buildings like skyscrapers, but we shouldn't put so many of them so close together. Cities are disgusting places devoid of nature. The way we should do it is build a few skyscrapers spread out so the people who live and work in them can enjoy the nature down below. They still wouldn't have to walk far if we could get each community self sufficient with enough economic opportunities for everyone. Just make a town one small cluster of skyscrapers surrounded by wilderness with smaller buildings nestled around like a rural setting. No one should need to drive anywhere, just walk between the buildings or within the buildings. If each town has its own fusion reactor, they can extract nitrogen from the atmosphere, condense or pump water, and grow whatever food they need, and turn mineral resources into whatever they need. The surrounding areas could have lots of livestock that they feed from one of their hydroponic farms.

>>37554Yeah, after having set up some hydro grow ops and dealing with all the stoned hipsters who couldn't manage to grow a pinto bean.... gonna call that one retarded. No offense and hate to break those dreams, but just doesn't work the way it sounds.

>>37562Y'know for most of recorded human history most people were farmers. The fact that we are here proves they grew enough food to survive. Just because your stoned buddies don't know how to grow things doesn't mean an average, normal person isn't capable of it.

>>37569Those people had years of trial and error and were taught by people with the same. However at the same time we also have access to all the knowledge they have and more.

Which is to say in the short run the average person isn't capable but given some time to experiment and practice we could do a lot better now than our ancestors. We would probably want to create strains of these plants that do particularly well in these conditions and/or have a tolerance for errors if we have a lot of part timers growing them in controlled conditions.

>>37570Yes, in order for people to know things they must either learn them themselves or be taught them. That's how the farmers did it, and that's how Fuckingfoot's stoned buddies ostensibly knew how to do it. It doesn't invalidate the concept of the average person necessarily having the mental capacity to conduct agriculture, which, as I suggested, is proven by what percentage of people were farmers throughout the course of history. Fuckingfoot's contention is that humans are in principle too stupid to be able to grow things, unless some centralized mechanized agricultural industry does it for them. So which side are you arguing for?